tv MSNBC Live With David Gura MSNBC August 19, 2018 12:00pm-1:00pm PDT
hour? gigi stone. hello, everyone, i'm gigi stone-woods at nbc headquarters in new york. we start by fighting back. omarosa manigault-newman -- >> donald trump is unfit to serve as president of the united states. >> she's warned she has more tapes and says she will hand them over to investigators. so how much help will she be to investigators? and nothing to hide? don mcgahn has racked up 30 hours of interviews to robert mueller. >> and on the chopping block, president trump getting ready to take away the security clearances of more national security officials. john brennan threatening to take him to court. but we begin with president trump lashing out with a series of tweet this is morning,
insisting he has nothing to hide in the russia probe. didn't mcgahn met with special counsel robert mueller. he has clocked over 30 hours of interviews over the past nine months. and rudy giuliani today is offering more delay tactics in the president's sit down with rocket mueller. here's what he told my colleague chuck todd, listen >> when you tell me that he's going to testify to the truth, and that's silly because it's somebody's version of the truth, not the truth. >> truth is truth. >> no, truth isn't truth. >> former fbi director dpired back at giuliani's truth statement. writing on twitter truth exists and truth matters. truth has always been the touch stone of our country's justice system and political life. people who lie are held
accountable. if we are untethered to truth, the truth based on the rule of all degenerates. >> petthanks all for being here. jef jeff, first to you, we learn some very interesting things about mcgahn, first of all that mcgahn allegedly referred to the president as king kong do to his outbursts. >> didn't mcgahn himself isn't commenting, but the white house press secondary put out a statement saying the president and don mcgahn have a great relationship and that the president values his expertise. and to be clear, don mcgahn has done a lot of work on policy issues that could become legacy issues for donald trump. he spearheaded the effort to
appoint the next judiciary, he spearheaded public relations. but these two men have something of a strange relationship, they don't often meet one-on-one, and the fact that don mcgahn is referring to the president as king kong, at the very least he's no fan of the president's violent temper and outbursts. >> we learn that mcgahn spoke to mueller for at least 30 hours. mcgahn may have been able to help mueller understand what was in the president's mind. do you think that mueller didn't learn anything from mcgahn in those 30 hours? >> if you take trump's word for it, there's nothing to learn, there's nothing to hide. but don mcgahn was there for parts of this crucial investigation, the firing of james comey, and the hiring of
mcgahn himself, so these conversations i'm sure revealed a lot about the president's state of the mind as he was discussing these things and according to the "new york times" reporting mcgahn was looking after his own legal footing so he had everything to gain by being transparent. >> the question is who is he trying to protect. peter, the "new york times" tweeting earlier that it stands by all of its mcgahn reporting that's -- when trump lashes out against your newspaper, do you think that signals he actually may have something to hide? what does it indicate? >> well, it either indicates he doesn't know what he's talking about or he's intentionally misleading. it's strong throughout this entire period, a year and a half, repeatedly he has psaid something wasn't true and it turned out to be true. the truth is he doesn't know
what don mcgahn has said to the special counsel. hi thinks he knows what don mcgahn told the special counsel, but he doesn't really know, he's putting his faith in don mcgahn's loyalty, saying i know he's loyal to me and he doesn't have anything to be critical about me. but 30 hours is a long time talking if there's nothing of value for the special counsel to be asking about. but don mcgahn has been there for so many crucial moments. there are few people he would want to speak to more than don mcgahn. . >> how lethal a witness do you think don mcgahn could actually be when it come toss this mueller probe? could be he's just protecting the president? >> we did read from that "new york times" article that don mcgahn has a concern about his own preservation, thus why the 30 hours with robert mueller and the special counsel team.
why is that relevant. because trump hasn't had the nerve to sit down with mueller and answer questions. his idea about what went down during that decision making time, for things like the firing of flynn, the firing of comey. that's crucial if you're don mcgahn and you're white house counsel. and you find something like this to be an exceptional, exceptional turn of events, you rarely get to see the perception chul thoughts that an attorney had whether white house counsel or personal counctsel with a challenge. that is an amazing incident or event that i think from a legal perspective has a lot of import in terms of where this investigation goes. >> and there's a question if president trump legally fully understands that mcgahn was working, not necessarily for
him, but for the office of the presidency, and there's such a d distinction there, we do have sound from his personal attorney rudy giuliani. let's listen to what rudy giuliani had to say about don mcgahn. >> the president encouraged him to testify, he's happy that he did. he's quite secure that there's nothing in there that will hurt the question and john dowd told you that he would do nothing but help the president. >> trump has been tweeting up a storm today, he declared his white house has the most transparent in history. how does that stand up to your investigation? >> if you read the president's tweets as messages to his base, as they so often are, you see that yes it is unusual for the white house counsel to have spoken to the special counsel for 30 hours, yes, it is unusual for one of my attorneys to speak
about me regarding my behavior, that's what's the president's trying to convey to his core supporters, there's nothing to see here and don mcgahn provided no inchristmas dmkricriminating. mcgahn wanted to discredit any finding of the special counsel before he presents his work to congress. >> basically the president's own lawyer questioning the fundamentals of truth, what does this say about our democracy? is our administration just like jeff alluded to, the public throws up their hands and says everything is partisan, what is the white house's goal here to muddle the story.
>> sorry, i wasn't sure if that one was for me. this is what giuliani was brought in for to kind of muddy the water ahead offense time so when the report finally comes back, everybody's already knows what's in the report before -- rudy giuliani is laying out in black and white. truth is not just truth. you can either believe what comey is saying, whor what we'r saying. >> and rudy giuliani has said as much, that he says his role is dual roles, yes, he's the president's attorney but he's also a spokesman in many ways because he does in fact want to muddy the waters and discredit robert mueller's report ahead of its ultimate release, what he's really trying to do is cement
public opinion ahead of this special counsel report coming out. >> we had the former head of the cia talking on "meet the press" talking about collusion, he said that what president trump has done is nothing short of treasonous, let's listen to john brennan. >> you have gone farther than most on collusion, you've gone farther than most on conspiracy. is this based on information. -- >> i didn't say conspiracy, chuck, i said collusion is certainly in plain sight. the things that have already come out, the people who have admitted to wrong doing with the russians and this speaks to collusion. >> what is your reaction to john brennan's words. >> look, john brennan, obviously he was cia director, what he's saying is he's also basing his information on what's come out in the public press in the year and a half since he left office.
senator burr from the senate intelligence committee said that ben unanimous's op-ed in the "new york times" said he was guilty of collusion reflected perhaps a disclosure of classified information. what brennan said today, told chuck todd, i don't need to read anything since i left office, i see these meetings at trump tower and i see all this other evidence -- conspiracy is a legal term, that's not what collusion is necessarily. we don't know if there's a legal case to be drawn here, but th e there's plenty to be drawn in the public record to make an arguments whether there was in fact collusion. >> and we'll find out when president trump meets with mueller if this meeting is in fact going to take place? what do you think about the meeting? is it going to place take and could mueller use the president's own tweets against
him? >> oh, absolutely, you can attribute everything to trump including statements of jewel jani. giuliani like other trump surrogates right now want to return the law to the dark ages, they want to go back to a time where there was no reason and no -- you rely on facts and evidence when you look at a case, you don't rely on the eye of the beholder, truth is truth and we will see what it is. and trump is not going to be able to avoid sitting down with robert mueller and frankly he's trying to drag it out past the midterms, it may end up happening as a sit down at the end of november. and you're going to have to have trump reel himself in and do his own version of trump.
unfit to serve, that's the accusation from omaronly roemao. aah! ...i would have said you were crazy. but so began the year of me. i discovered the true meaning of paperless discounts... and the indescribable rush of saving drivers an average of $620. why does fear feel so good? i fell in love three times -- once with a woman, once with a country, and finally... with myself. -so, do you have anything to declare or not? -isn't that what i'm doing? is not a marathon. it's a series of smart choices. and when you replace one meal or snack a day with glucerna made with carbsteady to help minimize blood sugar spikes you can really feel it. glucerna. everyday progress.
this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving...
simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today. omarosa still making headlines. the former white house aid appeared here this morning to fight back against the attacks that president trump has launched on her in the past week. here's some of what she had to
say. >> how did you feel when you saw the president call you a low life and a dog after you had taken all of these arrows for him? >> you know, when he called me that dog, i thought it was clear evidence, one, that he has absolutely no respect for the presidency. it was such a vulgar slur, and can you just imagine if he would say that publicly, what is he saying about me and other african-americans privately? it just really makes the point that donald trump is not equipped to serve in the role that he is in, in fact i would say that he is unfit to serve as the president of the united states. he has a lot to lose and in fact we're losing right now because donald trump is disingenuous about his engagement and his outreach, i believe he wants to start a race war in this country. >> do you have more tapes, more
videos, more email, is there more there? >> absolutely, i have this huge kind of 15-year record with donald trump and i'm very good at documenting my life, documenting things that happen but particularly things that were peculiar to me. >> will any of it be of interest to special investigators like ma mr. mueller? >> i talk about having a meeting with him and i share, anything of interest that thi have alrea shared. >> host of the show on entertainment weekly. laugh 00, i want to tart with you, donald trump's campaign suing omarosa for millions on the ground that she broke this nondisclosure agreement that she had with him. she's not backing down. does this indicate to you that
the white house is actually rattled by her? employers bringing ndas are not usu usual, is that correct. >> i think they need to push back in a very forceful way, to sort of siend a message to othes white house -- there's not much more in terms of recordings beyond what we have heard already that would be very controversial or explosive, for the simple reason that a lot of the white house sources and administration sources we have spoken with, that after a few months in the white house, omarosa was not a very constructive force in meetings and things like that and they kept her out of the loop in a lot of white house decision making. so i think she was not really present for a lot of high profile meetings in the white
house past april or may of 2017, which is why i think some of the more controversial and news worthy recordings we have seen are things that involved her directly, like john kelly telling her she's fired and something that's happened earlier in the administration. >> the power she has to rock the president, that is her ability that is even larger than his to dominate the news cycle and she was able to dominate that and muddle what he was trying to do this week and that makes her powerful in his eyes because she's using his most powerful weapon. >> she understands how to manipulate the media in a way that no other person does. when it comes to this, she's a diabolical genius, he has brought the receipts in her work to sell her book, her book was
number two on the "new york times" best sellers list, now it's number two. micha she's doing remarkably well considering the fact that she's universally loathed. this is not a woman people want to give money to. and people flocking to by this book shows how much -- >> she will drop another book tomorrow. >> what she did drop was a race war term. that was a strong thing to say, duke this is an effort to sell books, do you think she's trying to garner sympathy with liberals that may have turned from her? what is her motivation here? >> i think she's saying things that certainly you know a lot of folks on the left would be inclined to agree with her about and they have already been saying before her.
but we have to keep in mind that this is the same woman who during the cam pawn wpaign that country would be forced to be down on their knees bowing down to -- throughout a lot of similar racially tinged controversying going back to the birther movement and so on. so i don't think she has built up credibility on voices like that throughout the year and throughout her time in the white house, we heard from many, especially african-american leaders in the conservative movement who felt that she was essentially trying to margin marginalize them to have her be that go to person in the white house. i don't she has built up much credibility there and i agree with folks who might agree with a lot of what she's saying, raising her up as a resistance hero or anything along those lines, i would view a lot of
what she's saying septembericallseptember ical skeptically because she is trying to sell books. >> i do believe she was taking contemporaneous notes, she was clearly taking audio and she claims to have video as well. the fact that omarosa has been able to cull all this information, she's given us a glimpse into what a crackerjack operation the white house is, how was she able to bring all of that equipment into the white house? >> imagine how square scary ite to bring that type of equipment into the white house? >> she was 007 in the white house, so we don't know what she's been able to do, so it's kind of difficult to completely discount her, historically, yes, she's not been the most credible
person, she's been conniving, she's been what i would call an '80s era diva. in this publicity tour she has come across as extremely credible. you do not have to like her, you don't have to loathe her, but this week you do have to respect the fact that she brought all of her train. >> it's crazy as you said, it's sort of a comedy of errors. >> i think omarosa figured into the sermon that i attended this morning at church. and she is persona non grata in the movement. she's not someone who's fighting for the benefit of her people. people in the black community have largely regarded her as a race traitor. but when president trump
referred to her as a dog, the guest pastor at my church today said that that was even too low to refer to omarosa as a dog, she had a deep problem with that and she felt that the congre congregation at large should have a deep problem with that. it's emblematic of his willingness to go low and lower and lower and lower. that it's a deep problem. >> and president trump referring to people as a dog, which he has done repeatedly, never cease to amaze the public. and what omarosa is saying her role in the white house is, she said she was basically there to further obama's agenda, what do you make of that? >> well, i go back to, we reporepor reported on what is an i-- abou
two weeks after trump took office, and it all sort of fell to her and within about 36 hours of the event taking place, other folks in the white house noticed that she hadn't really lined up any guests, she hadn't done any of the lodgistical planning to put on something like this at the white house. and hud secretary ben carson didn't even know the event was taking place. i don't want to comment on her motivations in a case like that, but i think it's going to be very clear that if she were going to be the african-american point person at the white house she was doing a very poor job of it. and a lot of people in the white house ended up picking up the slack where they could and they excluded her in major einvestigator evernts going forward because she just brought problems more than solutions. >> you said she brought the
receipts. i want to play the receipts that she brought. >> who chooses omarosa to be the liaison to the black community, when you know that she's universally loathed in the black community, she's hasn't been invite to the proverbial barbecue at the white house. >> i do want to play what omarosa had to say. >> my intent really was to make sure that i was a voice edadvo e advocating for education, advocating for justice reform, civil rights. there was so much happening while they were trying to dismantle ever accomplishment barack obama did, i wanted to make sure that i was in there to preserve the things that he worked for so that we can advance. >> last word. >> what can you say.
the idea that she was there to preserve president obama's legacy when donald trump was speaking about the president in the most deplorable way possible. when he was questioning his legitimacy as a president, when he was questioning the fact that this man was born in the united states, omarosa was quiet, she was silent. so for her to now say that she was trying to champion president obama's legacy is laughable. but again, she's selling books and that's her intention. >> not necessarily in step with her. >> thank you so much for your time. fine discussion. we do want to talk about taking the president to court. what could happen if former cia director john brennan takes legal action against the white house after his security clearance was pulled? stay with us.
this is a story about mail and packages. and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪
welcome back. former cia director john brennan is not backing down after being stripped of his security clearance by president trump. first he said the president is drunk on power. now brennan is again insisting collusion is in plain sight when it comes to the russia probe. >> you have gone farther than most on collusion. you've gone farther than most on
conspiracy. >> i did not say conspiracy, i said collusion is certainly in plain sight. the things that have come out, the individuals who already have admitted to wrong doing, with the russians and this is what speaks to collusion. >> so joining me now to discuss, rav rachel brevard and emmy susman, thank you both for being here. rachel, is it acceptable for the president to pull security clees clearances simply because of criticism? because brennan did nothing to compromise national security. >> first of all, a security clearance is not a right it's a privilege, and in the case of john brennan, he should have lost his security clearance long ago when he lied to congress and only fesed up when he was caught.
i think this is an appropriate action, there's a lot of questions where he gets his information. again, it's not a right, it's a privilege and all of us when he go on tv and we say things when we don't know where the source is, we should have that looked up. >> not a lot would have been made of this if john brennan's security clearance had been taken long ago, but president donald trump is know saying it's in part because of john brennan's criticism and involvement with the russia probe. >> he's going even farther. >> go ahead. >> he's going even farther than saying something that makes sense to us, given the way that trump has acted throughout his entire presidency is because brennan has been an outspoken critic he would revoke it, it always comes down to stump and his egg o. i think more unbelievable was
that he was revoking his clearance because he was involved with the russia investigation. that seems leek somethi s like f a hollywood plot line. he said has he -- that seems unreasonable, but more in line with what trump has done so far. it the fact that trump himself said that he was involved in the russia investigation, seems insane, and the fact that more republicans aren't standing up to say this is actually insane, there is a bipartisan group, many republicans in the security community, bob corker from the senate, saying this is like a banana republic, this is unbelievable. but the fact that there's a huge abuse of power is why republicans are going to lose across the board in november. people see them as being a sign off of the president's ridiculous abuse of power. >> this is john brennan on why he says the president's behavior is nothing short of treasonous.
>> i think, you know, is sort of like a freight train and he's going to say what's on his mind. john and his rhetoric have become, i think, an issue in and of itself. >> that was actually james clapper, but he is pointing out some serious issues that are being brought up. emily, is the president being treasonous in dealing with russia? >> i think it still has yet to be determined and i think a lot will come out with the mueller investigation. but to brennan's point, the fact that earning we see in plain sight that's being reported in the public looks like collusion achbltd and i think it does say a lot if the former director of the cia and members of national security and intelligence say this is the fact pattern of the russians, this is how they meddle in elections and this is exactly what has happened with trumping and his campaign, i think that should carry a lot of weight for us. >> rachel, do you agree?
>> no i don't. if john brennan has access to classified information about what was going on with russia, he should not be speculating about it. state secrets are not john brennan's property and he should not be discussing it. claims of treason, not against any other person but against the president of the united states, calls into question the integrity of the entire intelligence community. if he knows something that's classified, he should not be speculating about it. the president has every right to review the clearance of someone who goes on tv and accuses him of treason which is punishable by death, this guy is unhinged. >> the president loves people to. >> -- to go on tv. are we going to take this seriously about the president revoking security clearances. can we talk about michael flynn from his own administration, who
has admitted that he lied to the fbi. can we talk about jerry's son-in-law who seems to have access to everything december sf -- despite the fact that he actually lied. >> james clapper lied under oath. but obama was fine with it. >> flynn seems fine. lied to the fbi. >> flynn is not monetizing hiss security clearance. >> neither is clapper. >> he just did two days ago. michael flynn doesn't have access to that and he's going through the court system and yet two people who lied to congress, spied on congress and lied under oath are perfectly fine to keen monetizing their clearance and make money off of it. it doesn't make sense. >> thank you both and the real kwi question of course is whose security clearance is going to be revoked next and how damaging
hundred roads named "park" in the u.s. it's america's most popular street name. but allstate agents know that's where the similarity stops. if you're on park street in reno, nevada, the high winds of the washoe zephyr could damage your siding. and that's very different than living on park ave in sheboygan, wisconsin, where ice dams could cause water damage.
but no matter what park you live on, one of 10,000 local allstate agents knows yours. now that you know the truth, are you in good hands? in this week's look ahead, president trump is gearing up for a busy week. tomorrow he will host an event that will honor immigrations and customs enforcement agents, this has hundreds of migrant children are separated from their parents at the border remain in custody. and president trump will go to a rally in charleston, west virginia to sturp for patrick morrissey. then on friday trump will go back to ohio to host a rally for jim renise. so joining me now to talk about all of this is lonnie chen.
these are some numbers i want to share with you that are very important. according to court filings, 2 2,654 children are separated, 565 children remain separated and 366 parents have already been deported. >> we should take a moment and just let these numbers sink in, because we're at a moment where they just kind of blow past us. but there's 565 children who were separated from their parents by the government and they have been for months. this is about the time for the trump administration to reach an agreement with the aclu to come up with a plan to reunify these families. and the government said that the aclu should take the lead in
doing these reunifications. why? because the trump administration didn't have a plan to bring these families back together when they initially instituted this family separation policy so they have been playing catch up to come up with a plan in real time. >> it's really unfathomable that there was no plan in the first place, and many of these kids are under 5 which is a very vulnerable time to be taken away from your mother. the trump administration is meanwhile honoring i.c.e. agents. what is your reaction to that? >> i think we have to understand these events as a set up for the midterm campaign season that we're entering into, i think what we're seeing is an effort to put president trump into a position to drive home some messaging that the white house and republicans believe is going to be beneficial going into a midterm elections season. why would that be? in hosting this i.c.e. event, it
will reminds people that this is -- really i think we have to see this all as part of a whole, yes, the optics, the contrast is problematic, but when you think about it from the perspective of what the public needs from this election. >> on tuesday, he's going to stop in west virginia, for patrick morrissey, his challenger is joe manchin. how is that when trump won it in 2016? >> well, this is a super -- >> it's a situation where joe manchin, who's the democratic senator from west virginia has done a great job of suggesting to people that he's going to be with president trump when it matters. now obviously the challenger is can he make that case credibly. if the republicans and president trump can demonstrate that joe
manchin has correspondented with pelosi. but manchin is a very good local politician, he's got inroads throughout west virginia. so this is going to be a challenging situation for the republicans, but nevertheless, sending trump to campaign against joe manchin is an effective way of getting the challenger joe morris sey acros the finish line. >> west virginia is a key battleground for president trump to flip in the midterm elections, so how crucial is this west virginia race in your estimation? >> it's a very important race, it could decide the balance of power in the senate. president trump won this state by 40 points in the 2016 election, but know manchin is still really popular there. that's why president trump is going there, it's about keeping senate and republican control, but the president would also feel the sting, if he loses this race having not been able to lift the party in west virginia as in alabama earlier this year.
>> lonnie chen and jeff bennett thanks for joining us. >> the jury in the paul manafort trial are giving indications that they're wrapping up their deliciouses. deliberations. you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from an allergy pill? flonase relieves sneezing, itchy, watery eyes and a runny nose, plus nasal congestion, which most pills don't. it's more complete allergy relief. flonase.
jury deliberations set to resume tomorrow morning in the trial of ex-trump campaign manager paul manafort. so joining me now are white collar criminal defense attorney glen ivy and "wall street journal" reporter aruna. thanks for being here. not surprising, friday, the jury asked for more time. they have a lot of evidence to go over. is a fact that a verdict hasn't been reached yet a good sign for paul manafort? >> well, i would have been surprised if they had come back that quickly. i think as you mentioned, 388 exhibits, 18 counts, fairly complicated legal matters to sort through. so i would think they would take at least a few days to get through that. now, on the other hand, if we get to next friday and they still haven't come back with a verdict, then there might be cause for concern by the prosecution. but i think at this point it's still too early for that. >> it would raise some red
flags, aruna, what will you be looking out for when the trial resumes? >> we're definitely going to be watching for any more jury notes that come in and, like we just heard, it's 18 counts. it is a lot of documents for them to go through. i think it's a little bit hard to read too much into the fact they're still out, but any sign they give us in terms of the questions they ask will be meaningful, i think. >> this is just the first step, right? paul manafort's second trial is expected to begin next month in federal court. do you think the verdict of this trial will have any effect on that? >> we'll see. i would imagine, you know, if it goes totally in favor of prosecutors, it might give mr. manafort cause for concern in terms of going through with the second trial. if he ends up with a hung jury or an acquittal, it might give him a little more momentum to fight the second case. >> glenn, i want to talk about paul manafort as a curious character. we've learned a lot of details about his excessive spending, that detail of the python coat
that was so expensive that he bought still sticks with me. he had mounting bills. he owed money. >> right. >> do you think this is going to hurt him in the eyes of the jury, that they just may not like him as a person? >> it could. i think the main reason the prosecutors tried to raise that was to show that he had a lavish lifestyle that he had to support and that that might have been one of the motives for him engaging in these kind of fraudulent activities. i know judge ellis was unhappy with some of it, but i thought it was reasonable for the prosecutors to raise that. >> certainly interesting. any predictions for this verdict, glenn? >> i mean, my guess would be that he's going to be convicted on a lot or most of the counts. i wouldn't be surprised if the jury came back with acquittals on a few of the counts, in particular the ones where the bank executive it sounded like wanted to make the loan in order to curry favor with trump via manafort. but i think he's going to get convicted on most of the counts. >> if this happens, aruna, what
could this potentially mean for president trump? >> that's a little bit harder to say. i mean he was asked on, i think, friday would you consider pardoning mr. manafort, and he declined to comment on that. so if he does end up going that route, that will obviously have potentially big implications for the white house. but the trial itself had very little to do with the president and his name only came up in passing with a couple of the bank fraud counts. but the trial itself is mostly about mr. manafort's personal finances. >> but you bring up a really important point, which is that president trump said it was a sad day for the country, that paul manafort was a good guy or something to that effect. and so if you're a juror on that trial, do you watch that and say, why am i -- what am i doing here? because the president is just going to pardon him anyway. does that seem like a signal of that to you, aruna? >> well, hopefully they haven't seen it. they've been told every day not to watch any tv, not to read the newspapers, to not talk to
anybody about it. if it comes on a tv and you're in the same room, to leave the room. so i think the hope is that they haven't seen anything outside of the trial itself that's going to influence their decision. >> and, glenn, what's your take on that? do you think president trump is signaling that he may pardon paul manafort in the future? he's not been shy about pardons in the past. >> yeah, i think the failure to rule that out explicitly when the question was asked is a big indicator that it's a distinct possibility. i don't know if we'll hear about it even if he's convicted next week -- i don't know if it will unfold that quickly. maybe after the second trial, it might pick up steam, especially if there's another conviction there. all right. very important trial to watch, and we shall. thank you for joining us. we will be right back. stay with us.
enter your destination and the dates of your stay. tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites... to find the best deal on the right hotel for you. tripadvisor. plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. other side effects include
thanks for watching msnbc this hour. i'm gigi stone woods. i'm going to send it over to my friend, the tireless richard lui. >> great to see you, gigi. thank you so much. hello to all of you on this sunday. i am richard lui. trump's red scare. the president lashes out at a report that white house counsel don mcgahn has been cooperating with robert mueller without his knowledge and going as far as comparing the investigation to mccarthyism. plus, omarosa goes on the record confirming she has more tapes and she's absolutely willing to share them with robert mueller. and philosophy of truth. according to rudy giuliani, the
truth isn't the truth when it comes to the president sitting down with robert mueller. so if the truth isn't the truth, what is it? here we go. >> the mueller team is panicking. they know they don't have a case. there was no collusion. there was no obstruction. this whole mcgahn thing leaked from them. >> mcgahn is trying to save himself because trump would throw him to the fishes if he could. >> i'm not going to be rushed into having him testify so that he gets trapped into perjury. >> truth is truth. i don't mean to -- >> no, it isn't truth. truth isn't truth. >> in trump world, everybody lies. i mean it's a culture of deceit. >> if this is their case for collusion, good luck, mueller. >> and that's where we're going to begin this hour if you were keeping up with all of that. president trump now escalating attacks against special counsel robert mueller after a scathing new report from "the new york times" revealed top white house lawyer don mcgahn has been cooperating extensively in mueller's russia probe and